AIMING VIDEO - part 1

mikepage

mikepage

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
We're forever talking past one another in aiming discussions. Some of it is people being coy for whatever reason, but some of it also is we don't speak the same dialect--and sometimes not even the same language.

So at the risk I've violated some time-honored language for discussing these things, I'm preparing two youtube discussions of simple aiming ideas. I hope to provide a context for discussion here as well as make clear--or pave the way to making--clear the relationships between the different approaches we talk about here.

Here's the first one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE1hnDmHhvc
 
Very nice job on a very interesting subject. I never cease to be amazed by the amount of and level of emotional involvement that surfaces in this forum whenever this topic is brought up.
It has probably been stated more astutely than this but it would seem to me that none of this is as cut and dried as one versus the other.
For me, I understand that a defined system (e.g. Joe Tucker) is going to put me close....after that I let my feeling take over for the remainder of the shot. I wouldn't trust one of them by itself but together they certainly give me a level of trust and confidence going into the shot that I would not have had using. But hey...that what works for me.:)
Thanks again for daring to wade out into this. I look forward to the next video.
 
Have to admit fella respect for taking time to try and explain and make further disscussion for aiming. Made some nice points. Now from that little video i now know i use the ghost ball system lol. But have too admit the analysis could have been made simpler LOL. I'll admit if i do struggle at any point its with very thin cutting!! But i think thats like anybody in the game! Ive just had too hit a few cuts on a table to explain what i do. Basically i look at the sweetspot on the OB, then go to the CB remembering the sweetspot walk into it and hit centre the CB & potted the OB. now set up the same cut shot but looked at it from edge to edge from the CB end with the imaginary straight line, remembered where the contact point wud be on the OB went round & low & behold it was pretty much identical to the sweet spot that id used b4 using the ghostball system! tried it with various other cut shots and its exactly the same!!! Never looked at it that way before, but will probably use it too check in future if in doubt. Even tho its very strange way of looking it!!!

R114
 
Aiming Video

Very nicely done, Mike. Hopefully this will help in the discussion of aiming with keeping everyone into the same thought process and maybe make some headway. I liked the thought about lining up the edge of the cue ball to the ob and sighting in the same manner. As Reaper114 stated, never thought of it like this.

I always just overlapped the edges. Maybe this will help bring up my consistancy on these shots. Good job. Looking forward to part II.
 
Tap Tap Tap

Nice, Mike, and very valuable. Thanks for beginning the difficult task of rationalizing and organizing our exploration of this most elusive and important topic. Aiming is a complex and extremely personal activity that by its very nature defies discussion and even personal understanding, and any steps you're able to help us take in those directions will be milestones.

You insightfully point out the special importance of the sight line, which is (maybe not surprisingly) almost entirely neglected in discussions of aiming technique. There are two or more possible sight lines for most shots (stick, cueball-to-ghostball, contactpoint-to-contactpoint, some combination), but I'll bet that few players are aware of that or of which one(s) they use and why. They may even use different ones for different kinds of shots and be utterly aware of it. I hope you'll/we'll spend some more time discussing this very important aspect of aiming.

Thanks again for an enjoyable, interesting, very helpful and long overdue discussion.

pj
chgo
 
Like others said, I'm particularly interested in this slide. Perhaps some instructors can weigh in on what they consider "proper" sighting, of course keeping in mind that people might differ.

Picture1-2.png
 
Where is the front sight on a cue ball?

In another thread we were discussing pistol shooting as related to pool playing with regard to the idea of sighting and aiming. It occurred to me that a major, perhaps neglected, part of aiming is the front sight on a cue ball. It seems to me that this sight should be on the front of the cue ball and this complicates the aiming process but may lead to a more reliable aiming method.

It is an easier matter to look at the aligned cue stick and cue tip as related to the back of the cue ball to determine aim, English, draw, etc. The cue ball is struck from the rear and it is easy to assume that this is the point that is used to aim. However, a cue ball is unlike a bullet in that it does not travel down a barrel. One must create the barrel effect with the cue stick. From this perspective it seems logical that the point to aim should be the front of the cue ball. This front sight is shown in the diagram as a line through the cue ball that terminates at the front of the cue ball and I wonder which end of that line people use to aim.

It could be assumed that the stroke should take care of the line through the cue ball. However, given that English is used on many shots this is not necessarily the case. In addition, if one is not aiming the front of the cue ball it is likely that one will unintentionally place English on the shot with unintended swerve and deflection. For long runs (potting many balls) wouldn't the front of the line through the cue ball be the more important aim point?

The line of aim is another matter and the line on the right edge of the cue ball to the left edge of the object ball in the previous diagram is one line that estimates the contact points. The other line of aim is the extension of the front sight on the cue ball to its end point at the ghost ball location. I have read that some people advocate aiming the center of the cue ball at the center of the ghost ball location and this is a reasonable aim end point when no English is used.

However, aiming the center of the cue ball at the center of the ghost ball neglects the unintended effects of Engligh when the cue stick is not aligned on the exact center of the cue ball as indicated by the line through the center of the cue ball.

So it would seem that one can aim the front of the cue ball at the ghost ball position, the edge of the cue ball can be aimed at the edge of the object ball but this neglects the slight deflection that can be obtained from not aiming through the front of the cue ball. Alternatively, both lines can be used as parallel tracks.

In any case I propose that one creates the pistol barrel effect by sighting though the cue ball to the front of the cue ball to aim along some line. From my observations people often know where they want to hit the object ball as evidenced by their surprise when the the cue ball did not go to the place they aimed. This may be due to the lack of a barrel and hence there is a need to create a barrel effect to shoot straight and don't we all want ot be straight shooters. :D
 
Last edited:
Seeing the front sight

Another consideration.

Obviously one cannot see the front of a cue ball when in the shooting position. It might be thought that it is not possible to use the front of the cue ball to aim. From a purely literal perspective this is true.

However, consider the idea that one cannot literally see the line of travel for the cue ball because one is above the table and looking down on the cue ball. So the player interprets what he sees. That is she (no offense intended to the ladies) mentally shifts their perspective to interpret the horizontal line of travel as seen from an angle. We do this naturally because we cannot get on that line. Snooker players understand the importance of this above the table perspective and that is why they get their chins so close to the stick.

The player can estimate or interpret the location of the exact front of the cue ball when aiming just as the player estimates the horizontal roll. Here too it is a matter of experience and training the mind to see this point.

See what I mean?:rolleyes:
 
JoeW said:
Another consideration.

Obviously one cannot see the front of a cue ball when in the shooting position. It might be thought that it is not possible to use the front of the cue ball to aim. From a purely literal perspective this is true.

However, consider the idea that one cannot literally see the line of travel for the cue ball because one is above the table and looking down on the cue ball. So the player interprets what he sees. That is she (no offense intended to the ladies) mentally shifts their perspective to interpret the horizontal line of travel as seen from an angle. We do this naturally because we cannot get on that line. Snooker players understand the importance of this above the table perspective and that is why they get their chins so close to the stick.

The player can estimate or interpret the location of the exact front of the cue ball when aiming just as the player estimates the horizontal roll. Here too it is a matter of experience and training the mind to see this point.

See what I mean?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Joe, perhaps you can elaborate on this, I'm not sure I'm following you. And why would the above the table perspective lead you to putting your chin closer to the stick? (I do it as well)

Incidentally, it is interesting to note that Joe Tucker's aiming system places great importance on the front of the cue ball. As he says, most people know how to locate the contact point on the OB, but don't really think about the contact point in the CB. It is much harder to visualize, and I find it very difficult to do, if I try it ends up just becoming "aiming by feel" rather than thinking about the contact point on the CB.
 
Hi PKM:
First I am not a pool instructor, just a guy who thinks about things so I could be way off base and bring this stuff up for discussion. These ideas do seem to make sense to me. We will just have to wait to see what the real pros think.

The above the table perspective makes it impossible to see through the object ball's horizontal center line (1.125 inches off the table) and the line of travel to the pocket because we are viewing this line from an off angle and attempting to estimate a long horizontal line of travel.

When I get my chin closer to the cue stick, I am getting closer to the actual line of travel for the cue ball and it is "easier" to estimate the center of the object ball and its line of travel. At least that seems to be the case for me with my old eyes and relatively good back.

Ya know, I really have to get some of Joe Tucker's stuff. This is twice now I have bumped into his way of thinking. I did go look at some of his YouTube stuff and was impressed. The man seems to put a great deal of effort into his teaching and that makes it worth spending some bucks. I also like his willingness to discuss issues.
 
Last edited:
Joe, the reason I asked is because it seems to me the above-the-table-perspective gives you a better perspective for aiming. And most of the advice I've heard is to aim while in this position before you set up for the shot. Often the shot might look "wrong" when you're down. But that may not be in conflict with what you're saying.
 
I agree that we establish the line of aim and desired cue ball position while standing up. In fact, I like to go look at the OB from behind the OB to the pocket. This helps me establish the relative point of contact and I often use the design on the OB to see the contact point.

Then I like to stand about three feet back behind the CB and walk directly into the shot as this gives a slightly different perspective for lining up the cue stick and CB.

Once I am ready then I get down on the table with my chin relatively low of the cue stick and try to roll the CB to the exact spot as needed.

Sometimes it works, but not for 100 balls for me :mad:
 
PKM said:
Like others said, I'm particularly interested in this slide. Perhaps some instructors can weigh in on what they consider "proper" sighting, of course keeping in mind that people might differ.

Picture1-2.png
Click to expand...
I'm not an active instructor, although I've taught a couple of courses and do some occasional coaching, but I do have an opinion about this.

While I believe the "contact points line" (adjusted for squirve) is critical for shotmaking, I think the "stick line" is even more critical because

1. the stick is the shooter's sole means of control
2. it's part of "tip-to-ghost ball" aiming, which I prefer
3. consistent head/stick alignment aids consistent stance
4. it gives a clear "real time" visual check for stroke and tip placement

Whichever line you choose as your sight line, the other one will vary in distance and orientation from your chosen one - because of the changing amounts of cut, tip offset and squirve - so there are tradeoffs either way. But the above considerations tip the scales for me.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
Any pros not using the stick line as the sight line? They seem to have the cuestick positioned the same way under their chin or dominant eye each shot, so it seems the sight line for them is always the same, along the stick line.
 
We may be using the term sighting in different contexts. Sighting is observing. I think there are two parts to this when we are at the table.

When we looking at the shot during our planning phase, we might walk around the table and view the shot from many angles. Finding the contact point on the object ball is one thing we sight. The line between contact points and the stick line are things we sight.

The second part of sighting is when we have identified our target and begin the execution phase. We sight our target and then aim (point) our cue to the target.

Mike, would you clarify in which phase(s) you're referring to in your videos?
 
JoeW said:
Another consideration.

Obviously one cannot see the front of a cue ball when in the shooting position. It might be thought that it is not possible to use the front of the cue ball to aim. From a purely literal perspective this is true.

However, consider the idea that one cannot literally see the line of travel for the cue ball because one is above the table and looking down on the cue ball. So the player interprets what he sees. That is she (no offense intended to the ladies) mentally shifts their perspective to interpret the horizontal line of travel as seen from an angle. We do this naturally because we cannot get on that line. Snooker players understand the importance of this above the table perspective and that is why they get their chins so close to the stick.

The player can estimate or interpret the location of the exact front of the cue ball when aiming just as the player estimates the horizontal roll. Here too it is a matter of experience and training the mind to see this point.

See what I mean?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Hello Joe,

I do not think I agree with this statement. I had started a thread http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=72448 about the transition between the older player style whereas players had more of a tendency to position their bodies above the ball versus the newer style where players have lowered their bodies over the cue. It seemed to me also that it was easier to sight "down" a line than to be above the "line of sight" looking down and trying to follow it forward. But, the older pros played pretty good too...:o Didn't seem to affect their play.

My original style of playing was more of an upright body postioning over the cue. (you might say, I was a stand up kind of guy)...:D Now, even though my body postioning has changed, I can actually see thin cut shots (85 degrees) better by raising up above and positioning my body over the cue.

JMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top